Manpower

by Lincoln C. Andrews

Investigation of Offense.—To be able to get at the actual truth of the matter takes tact and knowledge of human nature. You will be interested in developing this ability in yourself. It will often be difficult to get the man to be frank, he cannot quite believe in your desire to be fair, and his instincts of secretiveness, pugnacity, being a good sport, etc., all stand in your way. Put yourself in his place is a good rule during the investigation. It is going to take time and patience and skill, until you have established the tradition of cards on the table and a square deal for all. By avoiding ever acting in passion and by always showing a determination to get the facts and judge fairly, you will soon be able to get at the real truth about each offense, and to learn what it really means in your organization that this man has done as he did. Then you may decide what steps to take for the best interests of all.

Do not think that this is Utopian, or that it takes too much time. It is a leader's business to have time for just such things—and you really save time by it. Do it thoroughly a few times, and you will thus discover and root out the cause for soreness and trouble and establish a spirit of fairness and decency which will soon reward you by freedom from having any offenses to handle at all.

Actual Punishment Unnecessary.—A pleasant fact is that while every offense must be taken cognizance of, it does not have to be always actually punished. It may often be made the subject of a plain talk to all of the men, explaining what such an offense means to the success of the undertaking and put so strongly that a better result may be thus obtained without giving any punishment at all. I recall an instance in one of the inexperienced war organizations, where a senior officer, detailed to handle the case of a man actually guilty of the serious offense of sleeping on post as a sentinel, made it so strong an object lesson in his talk to the company that he put the whole outfit, officers and men, on their feet in discipline, and did not punish the sentinel at all. So do not feel that "punishment must always follow and fit the crime." Use your common sense judgment, and do the thing which you believe will best promote the discipline you are trying to inspire in all. A reprimand, with an explanation of what the offense means to discipline, is generally punishment enough.

The Leader's Responsibility.—If in the end you decide that punishment must be given, give it yourself. Be very jealous of the authority over your own men. Do not let anyone interfere with it or exercise it for you if you can help it. You want them to look to you for justice and see in you the seat of authority under which they act and to which they are responsible. This means that you personally handle every case, and make it clear that the decision as to the punishment is the result of your own judgment. If the offense must be punished with more severity than you are empowered to administer, then only send it to higher authority, and with your own recommendation. It is a poor officer who lets a court martial run the discipline of his command. The good one sends a man to court for punishment only in the rarest cases, and then because he is dealing with a recalcitrant who will not respond to decent treatment, and is therefore a candidate for discharge. The same general rule should be true in administering any office in civil affairs.

Prompt Action Necessary.—As the object of both rewards and punishments is the effect they are to have on the individual and particularly on the group, action in both cases should be taken immediately following the occasion, while it is fresh in the minds of all. Let your men realize that you are right on the job of bossing, and that the conduct of each is a matter of real interest to you and to all. To overlook offenses and neglects that appear willful, causes them to multiply, and discourages the faithful workers. The word or nod of recognition of good work is immediate, and has its effect, so also does the first step in recognition or correction of an offense. This first step may be an admonition, or even a reprimand where you are sure it is justified. But the first step is generally to call the man up and ask his reason—and to ask him in a tone that assumes that he has a reason, and that you intend to give it fair consideration. You may have to defer action for further investigation, but you have taken the first step and gotten the immediate effect. It only remains to carry on to a decision as circumstances determine.

Symptoms of Poor Leadership.—We have all seen men in positions of authority who are awful examples of what a leader ought not to be. A little authority in their hands seems to upset the balance in their heads. They lose all sense of how to deal with men, become ridiculously arbitrary and loudmouthed and blustering. They try to rule by "putting the fear of God into them," by main strength and brute force. They are the boss because they have been named the boss, and "they will show them." Their first step when they see anything going wrong is to bellow "what the h—— are you doing?" in a tone that implies that the man is not only a fool but a criminal. They outrage every sensibility of manliness he may have, assume his motives are those of a thief and a liar—and then expect him to respond with good work and loyal service. Of course that is ridiculous. Such methods of control bring only sullen obedience, and even invite open rebellion. Swagger and bluster are but a thin camouflage for incompetence, and it would be a wholesome thing for these leaders to be able to realize the scorn and disgust they are implanting in the hearts of their men. Some do not know any better, and may be made good by training, others lack native strength of character and are hopeless. Neither should be left in authority as they are.

Misconduct—Fault of Leader.—Where you find recurring cases of insubordination, or indifference to good work, you will generally find that the cause for it lies in the presence of a leader who is not good enough for his job. This is true in the army, and must be true in any organization. For it is true that men generally start out on any job with the intention to make good on it, and if many go wrong in an outfit, the answer is pretty sure to be that there is something wrong with its leader. Likewise where a leader finds himself unable to maintain discipline, he may well seek for the cause within himself. We often hear the statement "I've got the worst bunch of anarchists on earth. No one could do anything with them." This is an admission of the leader's own unfitness. Men run about the same, are subject to about the same instincts and controlled by the same general principles. I have seen the same group of men who were all but mutinous under a hard-headed, narrow-minded officer become one of the best disciplined groups of the whole command under a few weeks of a new leadership which embodied principles of fairness and decency in handling men. The lesson is plain, both to the man who wants to be a good leader, and to the employer who wants his subordinates to get good results.

Giving Orders.—Many a beginner questions in his heart whether he can get the men to obey him or not. Perhaps this will be the first time in his life he has ever been in a position of authority to give orders. He has been the servant rather than the master, in the ranks of his boyhood gang rather than its captain. He has never enjoyed the habit of command, and, unless carried along by some dominating influence, is ill at ease in giving orders. This is very common on the part of young corporals in the army, and calls for experience and training before they can make good. If the youngster by tone or manner in giving the order betray that there is any doubt in his heart that it will be obeyed, he simply invites disobedience out of the Adam that is in everyone. Common exhibitions of this uncertainty are—the sickening apologetic tone and even words, high-pitched shouting of the order, accompanying profanity, repeating the order again and again, and threats as to what will happen if it is not obeyed. These are all sad exhibitions of inexperience or incompetence, and are sure to lead to trouble. See to it that you avoid every one of them, and school yourself in the correct methods. Here are some suggestions.

How to Give an Order.—In the first place do not give too many orders, give as few as possible. Remember the requirements of the modern theory of command. Here is where they apply directly. Therefore you first make sure that the order is necessary, and that the thing to be done is reasonable. Then pick a suitable man to do this particular thing, call this man by name and thus get his attention, and then in a quiet tone tell him to do so and so, just as a baseball captain tells a member of the team to cover third base. There is no question of obedience, no thought of it. Your quiet tone does not assume that the man is deaf, or a surly dog, or a criminal, but does assume that he is an intelligent, loyal member of the team of which you are captain. It will not occur to him to disobey such an order.

How Not to Give Orders.—On the other hand you will yourself stimulate his disobedience if by tone or words you insult his manliness, question his loyalty and obedience, or by threats dare him to disobey. We see this often illustrated in the affairs of daily life, where men untrained in authority are required to exercise it, and generally give orders in such a manner as to stir up trouble rather than to get cheerful obedience. This is certainly true with most street car conductors and similar holders of a brief authority. By observation you may get a dozen lessons daily in giving orders—ten how not to give them, and two how to do it to get results without friction.